From jrace at attglobal.net Wed Nov 7 17:31:53 2007 From: jrace at attglobal.net (Jeffrey Race) Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:31:53 +0700 Subject: [pmmail-list] Folder sorting issue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Oddity here: Folder names appear alphabetically as expected in left pane of PMMail 2000 for Windows, and keying a letter brings me to the first instance of that letter as the initial letter of a folder name; successive key presses bring me to successive so-initialed folders. The problem occurs when I use the 'move to folder' function for a highlighted message; the Select folder window opens but the folders are ordered in a strange way: alphabetically for (IIRC) the initial install; then in order of folder creation date for folders created after I moved PMMail to a new drive when old one failed. Keying the first letter successively for some letters does not bring me through the complete list if so-initialled folders. How can I force the Select folder list to alphabetize? Jeffrey Race From Richardelli at earthlink.net Fri Nov 9 01:01:29 2007 From: Richardelli at earthlink.net (Richard Beeson) Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:01:29 -0500 Subject: [pmmail-list] Folder sorting issue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I just checked this. The main folders and subfolders alphabtetize properly in the Move/Copy window in my PMMail, and I just added a lot of new subfolders. If you look at the list immediately after adding a folder, it will show the most recently added folder last. If you close and reopen the program, the folders will be alphabetized. However, keying the first letter in a move/copy list only takes you to a higher-lever folder (inbox, sent, etc), not to subfolders a level lower. I just use the mouse. On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 23:31:53 +0700, Jeffrey Race wrote: >Oddity here: Folder names appear alphabetically as expected in left pane of PMMail >2000 for Windows, and keying a letter brings me to the first instance of that letter >as the initial letter of a folder name; successive key presses bring me to successive >so-initialed folders. >The problem occurs when I use the 'move to folder' function for a highlighted >message; the Select folder window opens but the folders are ordered in a strange >way: alphabetically for (IIRC) the initial install; then in order of folder creation date for >folders created after I moved PMMail to a new drive when old one failed. Keying the >first letter successively for some letters does not bring me through the >complete list if so-initialled folders. >How can I force the Select folder list to alphabetize? >Jeffrey Race Richard Beeson ================= Richardelli at earthlink.net From jgferg at mindspring.com Fri Nov 9 01:09:58 2007 From: jgferg at mindspring.com (Jim Ferguson) Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:09:58 -0500 Subject: [pmmail-list] Folder sorting issue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Happy pmmail user here just wondering if any gnomes are working to bring us into the 21st C? Jim Ferguson From gus at PhotographybyGus.com Fri Nov 9 04:44:50 2007 From: gus at PhotographybyGus.com (Photography by Gus) Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:44:50 -0800 Subject: [pmmail-list] AT&T Yahoo! Message-ID: Has anyone discovered a work around for using PMMail with the new AT&T Yahoo! security requirements? Basically a way to use PMMail via a secure connection... Regards, Gus - www.photographybygus.com www.uncensored-hosting.com - "Your Satisfaction Is Our Art!" - Incredible Hosting, Photography, Video, Graphic and Web Design! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.bawue.net/pipermail/pmmail/attachments/20071108/629f69e0/attachment.html From jimoe at sohnen-moe.com Fri Nov 9 06:38:24 2007 From: jimoe at sohnen-moe.com (James Moe) Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 22:38:24 -0700 Subject: [pmmail-list] AT&T Yahoo! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4733F250.3010905@sohnen-moe.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 11/08/07 08:44 pm, Photography by Gus wrote: > Has anyone discovered a work around for using PMMail with the new AT&T > Yahoo! security requirements? > Basically a way to use PMMail via a secure connection... > Stunnel works quite well. - -- jimoe (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (OS/2) iD8DBQFHM/JPzTcr8Prq0ZMRAtbRAKCK5EVF62/AqJBCDco8WfVpLNRwpQCfS9qX TlBrg7OTj/KTT6ltWWGz60w= =YfKn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tydeman at tybor.com Fri Nov 9 06:49:19 2007 From: tydeman at tybor.com (Fred J. Tydeman) Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 21:49:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [pmmail-list] AT&T Yahoo! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:44:50 -0800, Photography by Gus wrote: >Has anyone discovered a work around for using PMMail with the new AT&T Yahoo! security >requirements? >Basically a way to use PMMail via a secure connection... Suggestion #1: For output via SMTP, instead of port #25, try port #587. Suggestion #2: Get stunnel and have PMMail send via SMTP to 127.0.0.1 port #465 The readme file says the stunnel website is: http://stunnel.mirt.net/ My stunnel.conf file is: debug = 7 output = stunnel.log client = yes [ypops] accept = 127.0.0.1:995 connect = pop.att.yahoo.com:995 [ystmps] accept = 127.0.0.1:465 connect = smtp.att.yahoo.com:465 --- Fred J. Tydeman Tydeman Consulting tydeman at tybor.com Testing, numerics, programming +1 (775) 358-9748 Vice-chair of J11 (ANSI "C") Sample C99+FPCE tests: http://www.tybor.com Savers sleep well, investors eat well, spenders work forever. From dave at deezee.org Fri Nov 9 08:57:25 2007 From: dave at deezee.org (Dave Saville) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 07:57:25 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [pmmail-list] Folder sorting issue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <003-e5123447-12385.001@deezee.org> On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:09:58 -0500, Jim Ferguson wrote: >Happy pmmail user here just wondering if any gnomes are working to bring us into the 21st C? Not unless you are using OS/2 or ECS :-) -- Regards Dave Saville From bxstover at yahoo.co.uk Fri Nov 9 09:19:16 2007 From: bxstover at yahoo.co.uk (Ben Stover) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 09:19:16 +0100 Subject: [pmmail-list] PMMail WInXP+Vista future as open source Message-ID: If Blueprint Software is not willing to develop PMMail for WinXP,Vista they could make the source code freely available. This way users could improve some necessary features. I don't think that they sell currently any PMMail licenses So why not make it Open Source? Otherwise PMMail will we die silently. Ben On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 07:57:25 +0000 (GMT), Dave Saville wrote: >On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:09:58 -0500, Jim Ferguson wrote: >>Happy pmmail user here just wondering if any gnomes are working to bring us into the 21st C? >Not unless you are using OS/2 or ECS :-) >-- >Regards >Dave Saville From dave at deezee.org Fri Nov 9 09:29:30 2007 From: dave at deezee.org (Dave Saville) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 08:29:30 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [pmmail-list] PMMail WInXP+Vista future as open source In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <003-6a1a3447-35634.005@deezee.org> On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 09:19:16 +0100, Ben Stover wrote: >If Blueprint Software is not willing to develop PMMail for WinXP,Vista they could make the source code >freely available. This way users could improve some necessary features. > >I don't think that they sell currently any PMMail licenses > >So why not make it Open Source? Otherwise PMMail will we die silently. > >Ben > >On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 07:57:25 +0000 (GMT), Dave Saville wrote: > >>On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:09:58 -0500, Jim Ferguson wrote: > >>>Happy pmmail user here just wondering if any gnomes are working to bring us into the 21st C? > >>Not unless you are using OS/2 or ECS :-) VOICE had to *buy* the rights to the OS/2 code and name from them - and that took some doing. Several people had tried in the past to do this and had got nowhere. I can't see them open sourcing it - They specifically excluded the Win rights from the deal. I think one can still buy a Win copy. Would be interesting to know *when* the last copy was sold. Also the code is dreadful - We thought we would have a beta out the door in six months. It took us nearly eighteen. Currently on beta 3. GA very close. -- Regards Dave Saville From bxstover at yahoo.co.uk Fri Nov 9 10:04:42 2007 From: bxstover at yahoo.co.uk (Ben Stover) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 10:04:42 +0100 Subject: [pmmail-list] PMMail WInXP+Vista future as open source In-Reply-To: <003-6a1a3447-35634.005@deezee.org> Message-ID: comments see inline On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 08:29:30 +0000 (GMT), Dave Saville wrote: >VOICE had to *buy* the rights to the OS/2 code and name from them - and >that took some doing. Who is "VOICE" and since when are they trying to acquire PMMail? >Several people had tried in the past to do this >and had got nowhere. I can't see them open sourcing it - They >specifically excluded the Win rights from the deal. I think one can >still buy a Win copy. Would be interesting to know *when* the last copy >was sold. >Also the code is dreadful - Interesting: In which prograrmming language is it written ? C, C++, VisBasic,.... ? >We thought we would have a beta out the >door in six months. It took us nearly eighteen. Currently on beta 3. GA >very close. Does that really mean we can expect an update of PMMail for WinXP ???? I cannot believe it ..... You are saying "us". Are you one of the developers ? >-- >Regards >Dave Saville Ben >On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 09:19:16 +0100, Ben Stover wrote: >>If Blueprint Software is not willing to develop PMMail for WinXP,Vista they could make the source code >>freely available. This way users could improve some necessary features. >> >>I don't think that they sell currently any PMMail licenses >> >>So why not make it Open Source? Otherwise PMMail will we die silently. >> >>Ben >> >>On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 07:57:25 +0000 (GMT), Dave Saville wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:09:58 -0500, Jim Ferguson wrote: >> >>>>Happy pmmail user here just wondering if any gnomes are working to bring us into the 21st C? >> >>>Not unless you are using OS/2 or ECS :-) From lmaxson at pacbell.net Fri Nov 9 15:42:44 2007 From: lmaxson at pacbell.net (Lynn H. Maxson) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 07:42:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [pmmail-list] [***SPAM*** Score/Req: 15.8/15.0] Re: PMMail WInXP+Vista future as open source In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200711091542.lA9Fgj7O007843@nlpi001.prodigy.net> Why would you question VOICE's decision to pursue PMMail in support of the OS/2/eCS users who make up its membership? As the initial project leader of several months removed on the charge of proceeding too slowly it has taken nearly a year longer than I had in mind. I have nevertheless tracked the development and have only praise for those who have brought it thus far. That which has slowed or hindered progress at a rate which we would like to sustain infects all of the open or near-open source major projects for OS/2/eCS like OpenOffice, Seamonkey, and others. It would have doomed OS/2 could IBM have released it as open source. The choice of the languages you mention, as if a real overall difference in developing software existed among them, has no effect. Part of the problem lies in the third-generation nature of these programming languages and, one, the extra writing and rewriting effort they engender in all stages of software development, not just construction. Nor do they allow options to reduce the preparation of regressive test cases or the need for beta versions. If you add to that the lower operational efficiencies of open source with its distributed and unpaid-for volunteers, lack of tight management controls and direction, you should consider yourself lucky that anything comes out the other end. Neither Microsoft nor Linux, different ends of the same spectrum, come off as speed demons in terms of new versions. I don't fault people for doing the best they can with the tools at their disposal along with the way they have to use them. The way out begins with moving to using a fourth-generation language and achieving what SQL has as such. Give VOICE credit for its persistence in obtaining the rights to the OS/2 version of PMMail and that underway in providing an enchanced version to its users. I do. From Richardelli at earthlink.net Fri Nov 9 19:18:33 2007 From: Richardelli at earthlink.net (Richard Beeson) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:18:33 -0500 Subject: [pmmail-list] PMMail WInXP+Vista future as open source In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I have resorted to a workaround that, klutzy as it is, does the job: use two different email clients. At the beginning of the year I switched to Thunderbird because it has all the current bells and whistles. It does most things fine, but the quoteback is awkward, the automatic filters won't work on outgoing mail, and archiving specific messages is a nightmare. I recently spent two days archiving 6 months' worth of emails, and decided enough was enough. My workaround is this: I restored PMMail as the default client, but have it set so that it does not remove mail from the server, and it truncates any message over 150k, so it doesn't download all the bloated HTML or inline graphics that people send so often. PMMail downloads messages as soon as I load it, and checks for mail periodically while I'm online. I use it as a text-only client for my important messages. I have ingoing and outgoing complex filters so my mail is completely organized, and once a week I use a simple file manager (EF Commander, the only currently updated survivor of the OS/2 days), to synchronize my mail folders to mirror folders on an outboard drive. Once a day I load Thunderbird, which is not set to be the default client, and is set to download mail in manual mode only. It is also set to clear messages from the server. It brings in everything, including the HTML and graphic stuff, so I can see what's there. I do use incoming filters for a basic organization of mail. I don't use it to respond to anything; I use PMMail for that. Since I'm not worried about archiving the graphic stuff, I'm freed of the hassle of breaking files out of Thunderbird into separate EML files to be archived. Most of that stuff can just be deleted after I look at it. I really wish PMMail could be updated. There's a similar program, Pegasus Mail, that does have the modern features, but it also saves all the mail in one file, so we're back where we started. Eudora, the same. They all put the mail into one file. Ludicrous. PMMail is absolutely the only program that saves each message as a separate file. I can search the archives in EF Commander, get a list of files containing the text I'm looking for, and either open them in PMMail or open them from inside the file manager in Notepad. No other client allows that. This workaround of mine may seem complicated, but in practice it's not, really. I'm so happy to be back with PMMail as my default client that I'll keep using it until the day comes that the operating system no longer allows it to function. I don't know how it runs in Vista, but I'm not taking the chance. I'll stick with XP. Richard On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 09:19:16 +0100, Ben Stover wrote: >If Blueprint Software is not willing to develop PMMail for WinXP,Vista they could make the source code >freely available. This way users could improve some necessary features. >I don't think that they sell currently any PMMail licenses >So why not make it Open Source? Otherwise PMMail will we die silently. >Ben >On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 07:57:25 +0000 (GMT), Dave Saville wrote: >>On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:09:58 -0500, Jim Ferguson wrote: >>>Happy pmmail user here just wondering if any gnomes are working to bring us into the 21st C? >>Not unless you are using OS/2 or ECS :-) >>-- >>Regards >>Dave Saville Richard Beeson ================= Richardelli at earthlink.net From steve at qmss.com Fri Nov 9 19:48:43 2007 From: steve at qmss.com (Steve Ewing) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 13:48:43 -0500 Subject: [pmmail-list] PMMail WInXP+Vista future as open source In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11/9/07, Richard Beeson wrote: > I have resorted to a workaround that, klutzy as it is, does the job: use two different email clients. > [...] > > I really wish PMMail could be updated. There's a similar program, Pegasus Mail, that does have the modern features, but it also saves all the mail in one file, so > we're back where we started. Eudora, the same. They all put the mail into one file. Ludicrous. PMMail is absolutely the only program that saves each message > as a separate file. TheBat! is not bad-- it has a PMMail-like interface, and so on and so on; it does save the mail as one file, but you can export it as a Unix-style mail file (or multiple files, if you wish), which gives you the text search ability etc. -- http://www.qmss.com From phil at kanafi.org Fri Nov 9 19:57:50 2007 From: phil at kanafi.org (Phil Kane) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 11:57:50 -0700 Subject: [pmmail-list] Folder sorting issue In-Reply-To: <003-e5123447-12385.001@deezee.org> Message-ID: <200711091958.lA9JwXrf025484@omr1.networksolutionsemail.com> On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 07:57:25 +0000 (GMT), Dave Saville wrote: >> Happy pmmail user here "Me too" >> just wondering if any gnomes are working to bring us into the >> 21st C? > Not unless you are using OS/2 or ECS :-) Is that the punishment for those of us who had to leave OS/2 - ECS because the apps that we needed were not available in the latter? Two things that I wouldn't want changed are the ability to use an external text editor and the storage of messages as individual files, not hidden in a database. -- Phil Kane From dave at deezee.org Fri Nov 9 21:02:17 2007 From: dave at deezee.org (Dave Saville) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 20:02:17 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [pmmail-list] Folder sorting issue In-Reply-To: <200711091958.lA9JwXrf025484@omr1.networksolutionsemail.com> Message-ID: <003-c9bc3447-26000.008@deezee.org> On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 11:57:50 -0700, Phil Kane wrote: >On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 07:57:25 +0000 (GMT), Dave Saville wrote: > >>> Happy pmmail user here > > "Me too" > >>> just wondering if any gnomes are working to bring us into the >>> 21st C? > >> Not unless you are using OS/2 or ECS :-) > > Is that the punishment for those of us who had to leave OS/2 - > ECS because the apps that we needed were not available in the > latter? > > Two things that I wouldn't want changed are the ability to use > an external text editor and the storage of messages as individual > files, not hidden in a database. They are both still there - along with a zillion bug fixes and a load of new features. -- Regards Dave Saville From mlueck at lueckdatasystems.com Fri Nov 9 21:13:37 2007 From: mlueck at lueckdatasystems.com (Michael Lueck) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 15:13:37 -0500 Subject: [pmmail-list] PMMail WInXP+Vista future as open source In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4734BF71.1000107@lueckdatasystems.com> Ben Stover wrote: > Otherwise PMMail will we die silently. I used the Perl scripts to migrate from PMMail on Windows over to ThunderBird about the time that 2.0 was officially releasing. Yes, it is certainly not PMMail. However, I was able to eliminate POPFile, have an encrypted connection to the server, and decent ability to deal with the HTML emails folks insist on sending. As an added bonus, now my email is portable between Windows, Linux, and even OS/2 if I ever wanted to. So I am thinking of switching to Ubuntu (7.10) and running FF / TB and Parallels which is a VM environment which is capable of booting (among other things) Windows to run the rest of the apps that are not available in a native Linux version, and eCS just for old times sake. FireFTP add-on for Firefox eliminated my GUI FTP client need, and is cross platform as well. Cross platform, cross platform, cross platform... that is my platform, cross platform! -- Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ From steve at qmss.com Fri Nov 9 21:25:09 2007 From: steve at qmss.com (Steve Ewing) Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 15:25:09 -0500 Subject: [pmmail-list] PMMail WInXP+Vista future as open source In-Reply-To: <4734BF71.1000107@lueckdatasystems.com> References: <4734BF71.1000107@lueckdatasystems.com> Message-ID: On 11/9/07, Michael Lueck wrote: > > Yes, it is certainly not PMMail. > > However, I was able to eliminate POPFile, have an encrypted connection to the server, and decent ability to deal with the HTML emails folks insist on sending. > > As an added bonus, now my email is portable between Windows, Linux, and even OS/2 if I ever wanted to. Even worse: I went from PMMail for OS/2 to PMMail for Windows, then to TheBat!. Finally, having been using gmail at work, I exported all my messages (since 1994!) to Unix files, copied them to my Unix server, and used POP to retrieve them to a gmail account, and now I am all web-based. Different, not as versatile, and so on, but it gets the job done and is, of course, eminently searchable. I am still nostalgic for PMMail, though, hence my continued presence on this list. Who knows what may happen? -- http://www.qmss.com From Richardelli at earthlink.net Fri Nov 9 22:08:43 2007 From: Richardelli at earthlink.net (Richard Beeson) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 16:08:43 -0500 Subject: [pmmail-list] Folder sorting issue In-Reply-To: <003-c9bc3447-26000.008@deezee.org> Message-ID: Dave, are you talking about the OS/2 version, or is there a new version for Windows in the works that we don't know about? On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 20:02:17 +0000 (GMT), Dave Saville wrote: >> >>> Not unless you are using OS/2 or ECS :-) >> >> Is that the punishment for those of us who had to leave OS/2 - >> ECS because the apps that we needed were not available in the >> latter? >> >> Two things that I wouldn't want changed are the ability to use >> an external text editor and the storage of messages as individual >> files, not hidden in a database. >They are both still there - along with a zillion bug fixes and a load >of new features. >-- >Regards >Dave Saville Richard Beeson ================= Richardelli at earthlink.net From jgferg at mindspring.com Fri Nov 9 22:28:03 2007 From: jgferg at mindspring.com (Jim Ferguson) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 16:28:03 -0500 Subject: [pmmail-list] Folder sorting issue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I second the query and add that I use PMMail on XP Professional and it's at least as good as guh'mint work, if not better. The seminar I teach demands huge individual/portable folder storage with a torrent of e-mail. PMMail--like Porsche--there is no substitute! On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 16:08:43 -0500, Richard Beeson wrote: >Dave, are you talking about the OS/2 version, or is there a new version for Windows in the works that we don't know about? >On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 20:02:17 +0000 (GMT), Dave Saville wrote: >>> >>>> Not unless you are using OS/2 or ECS :-) >>> >>> Is that the punishment for those of us who had to leave OS/2 - >>> ECS because the apps that we needed were not available in the >>> latter? >>> >>> Two things that I wouldn't want changed are the ability to use >>> an external text editor and the storage of messages as individual >>> files, not hidden in a database. >>They are both still there - along with a zillion bug fixes and a load >>of new features. >>-- >>Regards >>Dave Saville >Richard Beeson >================= >Richardelli at earthlink.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.bawue.net/pipermail/pmmail/attachments/20071109/8709e923/attachment.html From jrace at attglobal.net Sat Nov 10 00:23:01 2007 From: jrace at attglobal.net (Jeffrey Race) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 23:23:01 +0000 Subject: [pmmail-list] Folder sorting issue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:01:29 -0500, Richard Beeson wrote:>I just checked this. The main folders and subfolders alphabtetize properly in the Move/Copy window in my PMMail, and I just added a lot of new subfolders. If >you look at the list immediately after adding a folder, it will show the most recently added folder last. If you close and reopen the program, the folders will be >alphabetized. NO, in my PMMail 2000 runnning on W2K, the folders never re-alphabetize after reopening the program. It has been this way for years. How can I force alphabetization? Jeffrey Race From talldad at kepl.com.au Sat Nov 10 00:18:53 2007 From: talldad at kepl.com.au (John Angelico) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 10:18:53 +1100 (AEDT) Subject: [pmmail-list] pmmail-list@blueprintsoftwareworks.com message digest 11/09/2007 09:01 (#2007-945) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <0037469440.0000067Y@ollie> On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 09:01:03 -0500, brandonk at blueprintsoftwareworks.com wrote: >Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:09:58 -0500 >From: "Jim Ferguson" >Subject: Re: Folder sorting issue > >Happy pmmail user here just wondering if any gnomes are working to bring us into the 21st C? > >Jim Ferguson Hi Jim. Gnomes are located over at OS2 Voice organisation, now the owners of the OS/2 version of PMMail. Yes, much work has been done on it and a new closed beta 3 of v3 is being tested now. Best regards John Angelico OS/2 SIG os2 at melbpc.org.au or talldad at kepl.com.au ___________________ From talldad at kepl.com.au Sat Nov 10 01:20:13 2007 From: talldad at kepl.com.au (John Angelico) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 11:20:13 +1100 (AEDT) Subject: [pmmail-list] pmmail-list@blueprintsoftwareworks.com message digest 11/09/2007 09:01 (#2007-945) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <0041005920.00000680@ollie> On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 18:44:54 -0500, Jim Ferguson wrote: >but....but...but...what about us poor suckers who had to go to the dark side of Windooze? :(( Uh, sorry, but I can't answer that. I stayed away from the dark side here, although I do have PMMail2000 installed at work where I have no choice but to darken my hands with WinXp. You will probably need to hammer away at the usual suspects, being the current owner/s of PMMail2000. However, my apologies for forgetting there were two groups of users represented on the list. Best regards John Angelico OS/2 SIG os2 at melbpc.org.au or talldad at kepl.com.au ___________________ From Richardelli at earthlink.net Sat Nov 10 01:29:53 2007 From: Richardelli at earthlink.net (Richard Beeson) Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 19:29:53 -0500 Subject: [pmmail-list] Folder sorting issue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Don't have the answer to that. Since it happens automatically on my copy, I've never had to force the alphabetization. Must be something in the OS. Are you in Win XP, SP 2? Win 2K? 98? On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 23:23:01 +0000, Jeffrey Race wrote: >NO, in my PMMail 2000 runnning on W2K, the folders never re-alphabetize >after reopening the program. It has been this way for years. Richard Beeson ================= Richardelli at earthlink.net From glisten at witworx.com Sat Nov 10 05:00:52 2007 From: glisten at witworx.com (RW) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 15:00:52 +1100 Subject: [pmmail-list] unsubscribe In-Reply-To: <1194663494.5383.0.camel@davinci> Message-ID: <20071110040053.11C034@mail.witworx.com> On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:58:14 -0400, Chris Peachment wrote: >unsubscribe > > > Perhaps all the people who suddenly saw that they were still subscribed to this list, and no longer want to get messages, could look in the headers of any message from the list-server for instructions on how to unsubscribe. Rod/ /earth: write failed, file system is full cp: /earth/creatures: No space left on device From bxstover at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 10 09:15:09 2007 From: bxstover at yahoo.co.uk (Ben Stover) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 09:15:09 +0100 Subject: [pmmail-list] stunnel recommendation for SSH Message-ID: I just want to confirm that "stunnel" works great and reliable over years here. I had NOT even a single crash with that great software. Hardly any CPU consum Very recommendeable. However built-in inclusion in PMail would be better.... :-) Ben On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 21:49:19 -0800 (PST), Fred J. Tydeman wrote: >On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:44:50 -0800, Photography by Gus wrote: >>Has anyone discovered a work around for using PMMail with the new AT&T Yahoo! security >>requirements? >>Basically a way to use PMMail via a secure connection... >Suggestion #1: For output via SMTP, instead of port #25, try port #587. >Suggestion #2: Get stunnel and have PMMail send via SMTP to 127.0.0.1 port #465 >The readme file says the stunnel website is: http://stunnel.mirt.net/ >My stunnel.conf file is: >debug = 7 >output = stunnel.log >client = yes >[ypops] >accept = 127.0.0.1:995 >connect = pop.att.yahoo.com:995 >[ystmps] >accept = 127.0.0.1:465 >connect = smtp.att.yahoo.com:465 >--- >Fred J. Tydeman Tydeman Consulting >tydeman at tybor.com Testing, numerics, programming >+1 (775) 358-9748 Vice-chair of J11 (ANSI "C") >Sample C99+FPCE tests: http://www.tybor.com >Savers sleep well, investors eat well, spenders work forever. From krevet at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 10 17:53:35 2007 From: krevet at sbcglobal.net (Bernhard Krevet) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 08:53:35 -0800 Subject: [pmmail-list] stunnel recommendation for SSH In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Same here. Installed STunnel and never had to thinkabout it again. Works also fine with GMAIL. If you have multiple email accounts, you need to include as many differently named instances of entry/exit points in stunnel.conf. On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 09:15:09 +0100, Ben Stover wrote: >I just want to confirm that "stunnel" works great and reliable over years here. > >I had NOT even a single crash with that great software. Hardly any CPU consum >Very recommendeable. > >However built-in inclusion in PMail would be better.... :-) > >Ben > >On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 21:49:19 -0800 (PST), Fred J. Tydeman wrote: > >>On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:44:50 -0800, Photography by Gus wrote: > >>>Has anyone discovered a work around for using PMMail with the new AT&T Yahoo! security >>>requirements? >>>Basically a way to use PMMail via a secure connection... > >>Suggestion #1: For output via SMTP, instead of port #25, try port #587. > >>Suggestion #2: Get stunnel and have PMMail send via SMTP to 127.0.0.1 port #465 >>The readme file says the stunnel website is: http://stunnel.mirt.net/ >>My stunnel.conf file is: >>debug = 7 >>output = stunnel.log >>client = yes >>[ypops] >>accept = 127.0.0.1:995 >>connect = pop.att.yahoo.com:995 >>[ystmps] >>accept = 127.0.0.1:465 >>connect = smtp.att.yahoo.com:465 > >>--- >>Fred J. Tydeman Tydeman Consulting >>tydeman at tybor.com Testing, numerics, programming >>+1 (775) 358-9748 Vice-chair of J11 (ANSI "C") >>Sample C99+FPCE tests: http://www.tybor.com >>Savers sleep well, investors eat well, spenders work forever. > From jrace at attglobal.net Sat Nov 10 18:12:10 2007 From: jrace at attglobal.net (Jeffrey Race) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 17:12:10 +0000 Subject: [pmmail-list] Folder sorting issue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: W2K On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 19:29:53 -0500, Richard Beeson wrote: >Don't have the answer to that. Since it happens automatically on my copy, I've never had to force the alphabetization. Must be something in the OS. Are you in >Win XP, SP 2? Win 2K? 98? > > > >On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 23:23:01 +0000, Jeffrey Race wrote: > >>NO, in my PMMail 2000 runnning on W2K, the folders never re-alphabetize >>after reopening the program. It has been this way for years. > > > >Richard Beeson >================= >Richardelli at earthlink.net > > > > > > >-- >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG Free Edition. >Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.25/1118 - Release Date: 11/8/2007 9:29 AM > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.bawue.net/pipermail/pmmail/attachments/20071110/e8a25f68/attachment.html From Richardelli at earthlink.net Sun Nov 11 01:15:56 2007 From: Richardelli at earthlink.net (Richard Beeson) Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 19:15:56 -0500 Subject: [pmmail-list] Folder sorting issue In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I still have a computer running W2K with PMMail on it. When I have a chance to dig it out and boot it up, I'll experiment and let you know if that's the reason. --Original Message Text--- From: Jeffrey Race Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 17:12:10 +0000 W2K On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 19:29:53 -0500, Richard Beeson wrote: >Don't have the answer to that. Since it happens automatically on my copy, I've never had to force the alphabetization. Must be something in the OS. Are you in >Win XP, SP 2? Win 2K? 98? >On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 23:23:01 +0000, Jeffrey Race wrote: >>NO, in my PMMail 2000 runnning on W2K, the folders never re-alphabetize >>after reopening the program. It has been this way for years. >Richard Beeson >================= >Richardelli at earthlink.net >-- >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG Free Edition. >Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.25/1118 - Release Date: 11/8/2007 9:29 AM Richard Beeson ================= Richardelli at earthlink.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.bawue.net/pipermail/pmmail/attachments/20071110/a77f9dd0/attachment.html From MAILER-DAEMON at bawue.de Mon Nov 12 02:17:42 2007 From: MAILER-DAEMON at bawue.de (Mail Delivery Subsystem) Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 19:17:42 -0600 Subject: Returned mail: Data format error Message-ID: <20071112011941.5D6F1E05F6@mailstore.bawue.net> The message was not delivered due to the following reason: Your message was not delivered because the destination computer was unreachable within the allowed queue period. The amount of time a message is queued before it is returned depends on local configura- tion parameters. Most likely there is a network problem that prevented delivery, but it is also possible that the computer is turned off, or does not have a mail system running right now. Your message was not delivered within 8 days: Server 125.20.80.20 is not responding. The following recipients did not receive this message: Please reply to postmaster at bawue.de if you feel this message to be in error. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: document.com Type: application/octet-stream Size: 28864 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.bawue.net/pipermail/pmmail/attachments/20071111/b714247e/attachment.obj From jrace at attglobal.net Sun Nov 11 21:02:00 2007 From: jrace at attglobal.net (Jeffrey Race) Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 20:02:00 +0000 Subject: [pmmail-list] Header files Message-ID: <6bnhiu$eo6pf5@smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net> On my system are 892 files of form HEAD200 .HDR consisting of the header of a past message and a fragment of its text. What are they, why are they here, and what consequence if I delete them? Jeffrey Race From mlueck at lueckdatasystems.com Mon Nov 12 02:49:35 2007 From: mlueck at lueckdatasystems.com (Michael Lueck) Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 20:49:35 -0500 Subject: [pmmail-list] Header files In-Reply-To: <6bnhiu$eo6pf5@smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net> References: <6bnhiu$eo6pf5@smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net> Message-ID: <4737B12F.7010303@lueckdatasystems.com> Jeffrey Race wrote: > On my system are 892 files of form HEAD200 .HDR consisting of the > header of a past message and a fragment of its text. What are they, > why are they here, and what consequence if I delete them? Probably you at one point selected "leave all mail on the server" which keeps the email headers so if will download only once. If you have no need for them, such as you have fetched all mail off of the server, then you can delete the headers in the account properties dialog, receive tab, and push the reset button. -- Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/